GUardian Automation - Suggestion

Help improve Bet Angel.
Post Reply
PeterLe
Posts: 3715
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:19 pm

For future developments could the BA team consider the following please:-

Would it be possible to include a condition that looks at the current P&L on that selection? (ie the same as cell c9, c11 etc in Excel?)

This is different than the close trade condition.
Take the following senario:

EG, You may have a strategy that places a lot of lay bets into the market (at say 1.9) iterations 100 times..0.5 rearm etc..and a condition that stops the bets being placed if the close trade condition <-10

Now if the selection stays around the 1.9 mark (or above it) it could place 100 lay bets into the market at 1.9 but the Close Trade condition wont be breached until the price falls to say 1.7, by which time it could be too late as you liability will get bigger as the price drops (and never come back if its the winner)

If we had a condition that looks at the P&L of the selection, we could simply say stop placing bets if the value is <-20 for example and in my opinion it would alow for greater control.

I can get around this at present as a workaround, but Id really like to step up the number of iterations ten fold or more what Im doing at present
Hope that make sense? and hopefully this should be easy to code?
Thanks for considering
regards
Peter
User avatar
Dallas
Posts: 22642
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 10:57 pm
Location: Working From Home

Have i understood your suggestion correctly that its a condition that looks at the potential total liability of a selection?

So if your pumping bets into the market you have a way of limiting the worse case if it suddenly breaks and moves against you?
PeterLe
Posts: 3715
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:19 pm

Hi Dallas
Partially. Its not just the liability Im interested n looking at, but also the profit on that runner..
Say you had a back strategy in play and you wanted a condition that stopped placing bets if the P&L on that selction was greater than £1000.
If you was placing bets always at 100, then you could use the number of matched bets. However, if you was using varying odds, it would be difficult to know when you had reached £1000 (you might be lucky and get a single bet of £2 at 800 and that would be job done, but neither the Close trade nor green all profit would guarantee to identify this as they use the reverse odds as part of the calculation) and they can vary immensely in play
I just though if we had a new condition:-

Selection Profit condition is =, <, > than X (you could include with/without greening too

It would be very easy to measure this criteria
I may want to stop all bets on that selection if it had a positive of £1000 or a negative of -20 irrespective of what the odds on that selection were

Or is there another way perhaps that I could use?
Thanks
Regards
Peter
User avatar
Dallas
Posts: 22642
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2015 10:57 pm
Location: Working From Home

Hi PeterLe

Yes it a great idea and something i would add a +1 to and can see many situations it would be perfect for and could be put to good use.

"Selection Profit condition is =, <, > than X"
So where ignoring any green/red figures which are based on exiting at the current reverse price and just looking at the over all end result for that selection?

My only doubt is i don't think it would be as straight forward as it appears and there would be complications in many other situations particularly if betting on more than one selection.

A simple example could be:
If we set the condition for less than -£20
Fire in 10 x £2 lays @ 2.0 it will then stop firing but if another selection/s fires 6 x £2 lays that's going to reduce to total liability on the original selection back down to -£8 so now more lays will start to fire in on that one - if the other selection/s are then offset it could leave us with 16 x £2 lays on the original selection which now exceeds our £20 limit

Unless the automation was only focusing on and firing in bets on a single selection throughout the race/event the condition would need to be able to completely isolate each selection and just look at the bets placed on that one and not take into account the impact of bets on other selections.


"Or is there another way perhaps that I could use?"

The only current way i can think of to achieve this would just be for the lay bets but its most likely the same work around you mentioned in your OP
PeterLe
Posts: 3715
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:19 pm

Hi Dallas,
Yes you're right, if its not a watertight set of rules it could be implemented wrongly. If for example you only had a strategy that was only ever laying, it could be used wrongly (as outlined in your scenario above). However I guess that applies to all rules in that they could be implemented wrong as we know BA will only do as its told.
I think virtually every automated spreadsheet I've created for betanagel over the years (ie for direct excel attach) references the Cell C9, C11 (ie the Selection P&L) etc so hopefully the BA team will consider for a future release
Thanks as always for your reply
Regards
Peter
PeterLe
Posts: 3715
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:19 pm

PeterLe wrote:For future developments could the BA team consider the following please:-

Would it be possible to include a condition that looks at the current P&L on that selection? (ie the same as cell c9, c11 etc in Excel?)

This is different than the close trade condition.
Take the following senario:

EG, You may have a strategy that places a lot of lay bets into the market (at say 1.9) iterations 100 times..0.5 rearm etc..and a condition that stops the bets being placed if the close trade condition <-10

Now if the selection stays around the 1.9 mark (or above it) it could place 100 lay bets into the market at 1.9 but the Close Trade condition wont be breached until the price falls to say 1.7, by which time it could be too late as you liability will get bigger as the price drops (and never come back if its the winner)

If we had a condition that looks at the P&L of the selection, we could simply say stop placing bets if the value is <-20 for example and in my opinion it would alow for greater control.

I can get around this at present as a workaround, but Id really like to step up the number of iterations ten fold or more what Im doing at present
Hope that make sense? and hopefully this should be easy to code?
Thanks for considering
regards
Peter
Support - Could I please bump this suggestion for consideration into the next build>? I would have thought it an easy modification and it would be a great benefit
(Im currently getting around it by also linking in Excel and firing in a lay bet at 1.01 and then using the "unmatched bets" condition, but Id like to try and move it to Guardian completely
Thank you
Regards
guy333
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2015 9:47 am

+1
User avatar
rusty
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2016 10:43 pm

+1

this would be a great addition...
Bet Angel
Bet Angel
Bet Angel
Posts: 3999
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 3:47 pm

Just to clarify with PeterLe and the +1s on this thread:

The P&L in Excel (cells C9, C11 etc) is the current P&L of the market based on all bets currently matched. So if you place a £10 bet on runner 1 and it matches at 3.0, then C9 would be +£20 and every other runner would be -£10

So you're all after an Automation Condition that tests the current displayed P&L value for that selection.... understanding that it'll be impacted by other matched bets on other selections?

As long as everyone can agree that that is what is required and that the P&L values don't need to somehow be isolated from other bets on other selections, then it's shouldn't be too hard to implement in a future build.

Also if anyone else wants to +1 the suggestion then please comment as it'll up the priority.
User avatar
megarain
Posts: 2031
Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 1:26 pm
Contact:

Inevitably, someone will experience loss, due to 'greening' and not having checked further matched bets, after the condition was true.

But, it would be especially useful for 2 or 3 runner markets, and, it shouldnt be so much of an issue, to write some sort of check, (maybe via signals), that loads number of matched bets, before P/L is tested, and makes sure its the same number, before executing a 'green-up'.

Anyway

+1
Pablo_Fent
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2016 9:58 pm

+1 please add this
PeterLe
Posts: 3715
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:19 pm

Bet Angel wrote:Just to clarify with PeterLe and the +1s on this thread:

The P&L in Excel (cells C9, C11 etc) is the current P&L of the market based on all bets currently matched. So if you place a £10 bet on runner 1 and it matches at 3.0, then C9 would be +£20 and every other runner would be -£10

So you're all after an Automation Condition that tests the current displayed P&L value for that selection.... understanding that it'll be impacted by other matched bets on other selections?

As long as everyone can agree that that is what is required and that the P&L values don't need to somehow be isolated from other bets on other selections, then it's shouldn't be too hard to implement in a future build.

Also if anyone else wants to +1 the suggestion then please comment as it'll up the priority.
Sorry I missed this..my apologies

BA wrote : So you're all after an Automation Condition that tests the current displayed P&L value for that selection.... understanding that it'll be impacted by other matched bets on other selections?

PL: Yes that's correct.
Some examples, You could then use this value to trigger another bet. (ill just refer to the value as C9 for illustration purposes)

EG IF C9>200, then lay at 1 tick above best reverse price, IF current back odss are less than 8...
Perhaps you could also determine the stake from the C9 condition. Ie lay stake is 10% of the C9 value (or even better of you could calculate the lay stake as the C9 value divided by current back odds?

When I was using excel a lot, I referenced this cell many times. I just think it will help others too

Happy to have a chat/email off line with the BA guys if that would help?

Thanks for considering
Regards
Peter
Yorkshire Pud
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Nov 05, 2016 7:51 pm

+1 for everything PeterLe's just said please!! C9 / current reverse odds = lots of happy bunnies!!
PeterLe
Posts: 3715
Joined: Wed Apr 15, 2009 3:19 pm

Not sure if this is possible already in Guardian and Ive missed it...
It would be worthwhile having a condition that checks how many bets have been placed in the last hour to prevent charges, especially now we have streaming data..
I cant remember when I last incurred charges but if you have a few instances running and a loose criteria for placement, the number of bets could rack up together with eth charges..
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by PeterLe on Sun Jan 15, 2017 12:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Geordie
Posts: 173
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2014 10:54 am
Location: North East

PeterLe wrote:Not sure if this is possible already in Guardian and Ive missed it...
It would be worthwhile having a condition that checks how many bets have been placed in the last hour to prevent charges, especially now we have streaming data..
I cant remember when I last incurred charges but if you have a few instances running and a loose criteria for placement, the number of bets could rack up together with eth charges..
+1
Post Reply

Return to “Suggestions”